Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Where is Adobe Speedgrade?

jake blackstone said:
,,, At this point, like it or not, Resolve managed to establish itself as a de-facto standard color grading software. And it's free, and it now works on all computer platforms, it's capable of one button roundtrip with Avid and FCP, can read and write pretty much any codecs, works with all major panels etc. ...
Click to expand...
I just want to mention that while I can't disagree with you, Baselight feels like a more refined and tighter program than Resolve. I can't pinpoint anything in particular. But when I've had the opportunity to sit down in front of a Baselight, it's a pretty amazing experience. Resolve feels old and clunky by comparison. JMHO.
 
My big "hope" with CS6 is to avoid a DI by having the color correction integrated with the compositing. This has some huge advantages for independents and multimedia productions in that you don't have all these massive DI files going around, plus you always are working against the RAW r3d rather then the DI. It will also be a huge workflow saver. AE is so heavily used in the corporate and multimedia productions, so many people are familiar with the packages ... I think it would expose the power of RAW to a lot of people. It's important for adobe to get the r3d integration into cs6 though, since it's the synergy of raw with cs6 which gives the exponential advantage.
 
"Send to Speedgrade" doesn't help much, "Send back to Premiere" without an intermediate render, however, is what everyone wants.
 
jake blackstone said:
Yes it is more expensive, than free. Not all companies subscribe to the idea, that software should be free or almost free:-)
Click to expand...
ha ha ha....free? anyone on this forum probably does not get away with much for free other than time spent on THIS forum.
 
jake blackstone said:
Smoke advanced does as is Flame. But my main point was to answer the general lament of lack of one software solution, that Smoke obviously is.
Click to expand...

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that Smoke Advanced has the same 3D tracker that Flame and Inferno have. A 3D tracker and a planar tracker are two different things for two different purposes. A 3D tracker animates a camera, while a planar tracker animates a shape in 2D space. Both have their uses, but they're not the same thing.

Of course, one can if they wish use a standalone version of Mocha and export the results to Smoke...
 
M Most said:
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that Smoke Advanced has the same 3D tracker that Flame and Inferno have. A 3D tracker and a planar tracker are two different things for two different purposes. A 3D tracker animates a camera, while a planar tracker animates a shape in 2D space. Both have their uses, but they're not the same thing.

Of course, one can if they wish use a standalone version of Mocha and export the results to Smoke...
Click to expand...

Yes Mike. Technically you're correct, but in case of window tracking, I think, the distinction is not material. I think in case of Lustre the very same 3D tracking just uses the 2D information subset, making it into a planar tracker.
 
Subhadip Sen said:
"Send to Speedgrade" doesn't help much, "Send back to Premiere" without an intermediate render, however, is what everyone wants.
Click to expand...

+1. If the useability of the interface, and the quality of the output are equal, than the ability to bounce back and forth from one to the other at a moment's notice would be KILLER.

KILLER.

In my opinion, it is far too difficult to move into and out of grading software. Not that I find it terribly difficult to do in Resolve, but the useability of doing it in Resolve is what I expected 5-10 years ago. I expect things to be even easier now, at least for going into and out of the most commonly used software packages.

I had the incredible opportunity to sit down with Lustre about a year and a half ago, and found that it could do some MIND BLOWING things in terms of tracking and grading. But getting files into and out of it was jaw-droppingly difficult for a new user. I couldn't believe both how amazing it was to grade on, but also how difficult it was to get into and out of it.
 
Less than a week away tofind out some hopefully good data about Speedgrade.

I've got my fingers crossed. This is in my top 5 in what to see at NAB.
 
Nick Pasquariello said:
I had the incredible opportunity to sit down with Lustre about a year and a half ago, and found that it could do some MIND BLOWING things in terms of tracking and grading. But getting files into and out of it was jaw-droppingly difficult for a new user. I couldn't believe both how amazing it was to grade on, but also how difficult it was to get into and out of it.
Click to expand...


Not if you also have Smoke.
 
Nick Pasquariello said:
I had the incredible opportunity to sit down with Lustre about a year and a half ago, and found that it could do some MIND BLOWING things in terms of tracking and grading. But getting files into and out of it was jaw-droppingly difficult for a new user. I couldn't believe both how amazing it was to grade on, but also how difficult it was to get into and out of it.
Click to expand...
Mike just beat me to it:-)
Nick.
I'm not writing this in order to start a major disagreement, but frankly, depending on the configuration, both of your stamens regarding Lustre could be misleading or plain wrong. First, Lustre is very capable grading software, but it works pretty much the same way, as any other hight end grading software. No real mind blowing capabilities to speak of.
On the point of getting the stuff in and out, it depends. If you're talking stand alone installation, then yes, it is pretty miserable experience trying to get the stuff in and out of Lustre. On the other hand, if you have a networked system, connected to other Autodesk stations, such as Smoke, then it is completely different story. All of a sudden instead of miserable experience it turns into mind blowingly easy way of getting the material into and out of Lustre. All you have to do is just drag the conformed Smoke project into the Lustre's timeline over the network and you're done. No XML, EDL, AAF, "sent to", just drug and drop the project. When done, the same way back into Smoke or Flame for finish.
 
jake blackstone said:
Mike just beat me to it:-)
Nick.
Click to expand...

I've always felt that Lustre's greatest strength is its intimate connection with Smoke (or Flame, for that matter). And its biggest Achilles heel is its reliance on it. Together they represent a "hero seat" that rivals Pablo. Separately, they're just two highly capable programs with limited I/O and limited format support.
 
M Most said:
I've always felt that Lustre's greatest strength is its intimate connection with Smoke (or Flame, for that matter). And its biggest Achilles heel is its reliance on it. Together they represent a "hero seat" that rivals Pablo. Separately, they're just two highly capable programs with limited I/O and limited format support.
Click to expand...

I agree with this assessment, if applied to Lustre. Smoke on the other hand reads and writes pretty much anything these days. Well, at least the Mac version. But it is still a more difficult process, than it needs to be. If Autodesk finally delivers on the whisper promise of squeezing Lustre into the Smoke, then it will be an unbeatable combination. Otherwise, I can't understand the reason for discontinuing Lustre...
 
jake blackstone said:
I agree with this assessment, if applied to Lustre. Smoke on the other hand reads and writes pretty much anything these days. Well, at least the Mac version. But it is still a more difficult process, than it needs to be. If Autodesk finally delivers on the whisper promise of squeezing Lustre into the Smoke, then it will be an unbeatable combination. Otherwise, I can't understand the reason for discontinuing Lustre...
Click to expand...

I'd love to see this happen but I've heard that Autodesk isn't going to do this. Hopefully what i "heard" was wrong.
 
jake blackstone said:
If Speedgrade acquires planar type of tracking, a-la Mocha, it will just bring it into parity with Resolve in the tracking department. At this point, like it or not, Resolve managed to establish itself as a de-facto standard color grading software. And it's free, and it now works on all computer platforms, it's capable of one button roundtrip with Avid and FCP, can read and write pretty much any codecs, works with all major panels etc. And did I mention, that's it's free? Frankly "send to Speedgrade" button would just save a couple of clicks over XML or AAF and Resolve. And what about those, that do not use Premiere? What I'm really saying is Adobe has a very steep mountain to climb, if all they do is just reissue Speedgrade without introducing some new and compelling features to try to even supplement Resolve with Speedgrade.
Click to expand...

Not true at all. Resolve tracker is fast and often just what you need for non-violent grades with soft edges but primitive compared to Mocha's, which is true-3D planar, VERY precise, and fails almost never.
 
Rob Ruffo said:
Not true at all. Resolve tracker is fast and often just what you need for non-violent grades with soft edges but primitive compared to Mocha's, which is true-3D planar, VERY precise, and fails almost never.
Click to expand...

What's not true? Presently, there is no need to use a 3d tracker for grading and no existing grading software does for this exact reason.
 
Flame Premium (Lustre, Smoke & Flame) is a really good offer especially with the new low cost Tangent Elements control surface.
Check it out on NAB.
 
jake blackstone said:
What's not true? Presently, there is no need to use a 3d tracker for grading and no existing grading software does for this exact reason.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong - I enjoy arguing with you Jake and do so with great respect for your work and knowledge - but there is a need. Keying windows (for different white-balance)is one - you need not just size/rotation, but very correct skew and perspective change. Davinci does a so-so job of this, but very fast/easy, Moca is complex and slow, but with nearly or absolutely perfect results most of the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top